Positive speculation does not harm a company. The only time that would be a legal issue is if the company is making the claim beyond what the safe harbour statement allows, or its part of a clear P&D scheme the SEC can pursue. The courts aren't interested if someone benefited from someone else's actions, only if there was harm done to a person or to the public good. A rise in share price is seen as causing no harm.
On the other hand, negative statements of fact that are untrue about another company or person causes harm. This harm is a legal injury subject to legal remedies through the courts. One would not want other people making statements that their wife/gf/mom was a prostitute if she wasn't or making unsubstantiated statements about his/her character. A company has the same right to defend itself against the same type of injurious acts. I assume that the statments BRAV is interested in were clearly statements of fact and not opinion.
Fortunately, BRAV has a written record to bring as evidence to the courts. I suspect that if the case was weak they wouldn't be mentioning it. Additionally, this course of action can be seen as a type of temporary revenue stream. Since this is a civil matter this will require the defendant to pay money to the plaintiff in the event of a judgement for the plaintiff.
IMO
Best to all
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
